PXW-X70 Frimware v2.0 is released!

[Mike Buckhout]

Originally Posted by Ricky Sharp

Rant asside, the HDMI output should at least be 8-bit 4:2:0. But I think it would be very helpful to folks should that actually be 4:2:2

Since the sensor is 10-bit on the X70, I should hope that the HDMI output at 2160p would still be 10-bit, and that you could capture this with the Atomos Shogun. Possibly still 4:2:2 as well?

[Tom Cambridge]

Am I missing something? I have a Sony a7s and record using the xavcs codec, import directly into adobe premier cs6 and it edits just fine!

[David Dixon]

The X70 codec in question is XAVC-L, not -S. Vegas, FCPX, etc. would not import the native files until now, although there is new evidence that it still may not fully work.

[Tom Cambridge]

Oops sorry read that wrong. But I am still very confused as I have been using the xavcs files in cs6 using the dslr 1080p 25p preset and have no problems editing, so when people say it isn't supposed to work all over the internet It makes me think I've missed something.

Back to the subject though. I was waiting for the release of the 4k upgrade before I went ahead and bought the x70. Ha 60mbps....bad move Sony. I will look else where. Shame really as I liked the idea of the 1" sensor in a electronic zoom camera.

[Ricky Sharp]

Originally Posted by Tom Cambridge

Oops sorry read that wrong. But I am still very confused as I have been using the xavcs files in cs6 using the dslr 1080p 25p preset and have no problems editing, so when people say it isn't supposed to work all over the internet It makes me think I've missed something.

XAVC has a few flavors. There is XAVC Intra and Long GOP. And now there's of course XAVC-S. Things get muddy when you end up reading about "XAVC" in the more generic sense. XAVC-L is really messed up. In Sony's higher-end units, XAVC-L seems to work great. Whereas with the X70, it's messed up with at least FCP X. And still messed up (at least for me) with the X70 version 2.0 firmware.

Originally Posted by Tom Cambridge

Back to the subject though. I was waiting for the release of the 4k upgrade before I went ahead and bought the x70. Ha 60mbps....bad move Sony. I will look else where. Shame really as I liked the idea of the 1" sensor in a electronic zoom camera.

The more I read about the 4K capabilities of the X70, the more I'm happier with remaining on HD. Along with the low bitrate, numerous features are disabled when recording in 4K (see my replies with them listed earlier in this thread, or check out the version 2.0 firmware update notes).

[Mike McKay]

The direct streaming to IP might actually be interesting for me. However in the manual it says "... movie can be recorded while streaming..."
Then in the very next notes section it says "... streaming not available while relecording movies..."??
So which is it Sony, honestly, who writes these things.

[Mike Buckhout]

I read that part too, and I think they mean that recording movies is possible while in Streaming MODE, but not while the camera is actually streaming. Nice, I guess, since you won't need to exit streaming mode in order to start a recording.

[Paul Anderegg]

So like, I can be doing a live shot of a huge news story, but the only recordings possible would be on my stations end in 1Mbps partially freezing streaming codec? nice going Sony, you really outdid yourself.

I am done with the X70, think I will replace it with a WORKING JVC HM200 that can live stream while recording, has ingestable XAVC, and manual control rings and switches. :-|

Paul

[Cliff Totten]

It seems that Sony put a higher value on IP streaming than they did on working on it's 4K codec. You can add all the features in the world to a camera but if it's 4K codec is feeble,...what are you really left with in the end?

A camcorder with a few cute toys but has a WELL below entry-level consumer bit rate!

Sony, please dump the fluff and free up the processor overhead to make room for proper 100Mbp/s UHD.

By the way,...your JVC competitor camera has 150Mbp/s H.264...more than DOUBLE the bitrate of the XDCAM PXW-X70

[Tom Grushka]

I feel screwed by Sony and want a refund or credit.

The PXW-X70 2.0 makes the AX100 look ironically like an FS700 in comparison.

I am on disability income and paid $2,300 for what should have been a decent pro camcorder to do video journalism and documentary (and hopefully short films for fun, too) with portability, decent pro audio and ability to do green screen (10-bit 4:2:2).

• Sony dropped the price $300. With no "credit" for 4K upgrade to those who paid the full $2,300. Meaning: the camera was NEVER worth $2,300. I got ripped off, and I can not afford to be ripped off.
• Highlight handling sucks. Firmware 2.0 didn't fix.
• Date/time stamp only available on interlaced. WTF??? Not an issue for me, but is for others. Firmware 2.0 didn't fix.
• Sony's "inventive" color management -- inability to align colors properly (see Paul Andregg's extensive testing) -- is a bug and unacceptable. Firmware 2.0 didn't fix.
• Slow lens cancels out (more than I expected) benefits of large sensor re: DOF and low light capability. Sony could have installed an f/2.0–2.8 lens, especially on this "pro" version. Instead, it's no different than the AX100 or CX900.
• XAVC-L performance sucks ... especially after Firmware 2.0 update. Can no longer preview footage in VLC ... it freezes up. Firmware 2.0 made it worse, not better.
• White balance takes, like, three freaking menus to do what should be able to be done with ONE button and turning ONE dial. Firmware 2.0 didn't fix.
• Streaming was promised. Firmware 2.0 enabled streaming that DOES NOT ALLOW RECORDING? No technical excuse for this. Sony's "good" programmers are working on more lucrative projects, I guess. Why this cam? Buy a consumer cam at half the price to stream. Heck, a cell phone can record while streaming, can't it?
• $500 for a 4K update that is half the bit rate of the AX100, which cost $0 for 4K 100mbps upgrade? Seriously??? Is this a joke? The joke, friends, is on us pros and semi-pros. I guess Sony just doesn't take kindly to the likes of our market.

Did I miss anything? Oh yeah, the consumer-ish pop-out power functions of the viewfinder and screen. Cute for awhile, then just annoying.

Does Sony hate the little guy this much to pull such a prank on us aspiring pros and "small fry" production houses?

A friend of mine (also legally blind), like me, is starting a video business. I recommended the X70 to her. I shall now "un-recommend" it. #1 reason? Sony's cavalier attitude towards owners of this camera as demonstrated in its over-delayed (since March) but under-delivering firmware update, and charging an extra $500 for half of what it is giving "consumers" for free.

I don't see Sony addressing any of the aforementioned issues in the future. I intend to write Sony a demand letter for either a $300 rebate check or a trade-in credit of $2,299 towards a different Sony product.

Does anyone think this is reasonable/unreasonable given these issues?

[Paul Anderegg]

The HM200 is selling for like $2700.....so by Sony dropping the base price of the X70 to $2000, with 4K upgrade, it comes in $200 LESS than the JVC, to sell new X70's. If they didn't DEVALUE your and my already purchased cameras, their 60Mbps 4K camera would cost $100 MORE than the competition.

Remember when Sony meant one piece FIT Betacam SP, and JVC meant S-VHS in a white box docklable package?

Paul

[Ricky Sharp]

I can see where folks have legitimate issues with the X70's 4K. But curious if there are others that are sticking with HD as I am. There, I'm finding the feature set for the price point to be very impressive.

From my end of things, the X70 is my first pro-level cam. So across the board, it is so much better than the consumer cams I've had in the past.

If money were no object, I'd love to have interchangeable lenses, global shutter, recording directly to ProRes or RAW, etc. But for my budget, the X70 fit perfectly. And most importantly, I am very happy with the footage.

[Paul Anderegg]

For 1080/720 HD, and if you stick with optical zoom and have a few extra seconds to setup each shot (damn buttons), the X70 is an amazing camera for $2000 new, especially now that the XAVC-L thing has gotten better!

I am currently trying to figure out how the WiFi works. I have my stations Teradek receiver settings in it, and I am logged into my WiFi router in the menu, but I am not getting any execute option or WiFi icons......back to the manual! I am probably the only X70 user who can/will be doing live talking reports on air with one of these little guys built in streaming function...heh.

Paul

[David Dixon]

I recognize everyone's different needs for a camera, and their right to a personal opinion. However, count me in the camp that is actually pleased with the combination of quality and price that the X70 offers. I have experience dating back 10 years with the Panasonic DVC30 and HMC40, and the Canon XF100.

I bought my X70 Dec.1 but am not offended by the subsequent price drop. I felt it was worth $2300 at the time, and was only mildly surprised that a price drop came as quickly as it did. I just assumed it was to keep sales going given that the 4K update was taking far longer than first promised.

I do agree that highlight handling is not great. I was hoping to achieve a log-like flat setting. That is possible to some degree with shadow controls, but the Knee reduction settings must be used quite sparingly. The only real problems I have had were before I learned to not lower Point and Slope too much.

I have no need for time/date stamping, wifi, or streaming, so these, while important to some, are irrelevant for me.

Using Paul Anderegg's excellent test postings here, I'm extremely pleased with the color. It may have flaws, but I do not see them.

I've done testing between my Canon XF100 (1/3" sensor) and the X70. The Canon's lens is 1.8-2.8. Despite the slower lens, the X70 does have shallower depth of field. It's not a HUGE difference, but a definitely noticeable one - so much so that I'm having to be more careful with focusing if I have the X70 wide open. I find the two cameras about equal in low light - except that the X70 gain is MUCH cleaner, allowing me a realistic 2-3 stop advantage.

I always shoot XAVC-L. The firmware update making it natively compatible with FCPX has removed my final quibble with it. I now do my previewing in the import window of FCPX.

White balance - I hit the WB button, make sure the adjustment wheel is set to A or B, and I've mapped the WB set to button 5 with my right hand little finger. No menus.

I never expected the 4K to be 10 bit 422, but given the low specs I may not ever do the upgrade. I'll wait to see how it looks. The one sample I've seen looks great but has very little subject or camera movement, thus masking the limits of the low bit rate. Unless all you do is interviews or such static content, the $500 might be better spent toward a future camera or an external HD recorder, especially if your delivery (like mine) is all Vimeo and DVD.

One other weakness not mentioned recently is the Image Stabilization - it's merely OK, not great.

At the end of the day, I prefer a regular videocamera with XLRs, etc. and picture controls so I can shoot semi-flat and "grade" in post. Even six months after buying my X70, is there another camera that for $2K can match it? I really don't know of one.

[Paul Anderegg]

I can only use Active IS because basic IS just doesn't seem to do anything. Active does cut the wide end, and causes some image quality loss though. On my X180, it's backwards. I cannot use Active because it wants to jiggle and swim all over the place.

Glad you like my settings David! If you copy and paste your PP i to the one above or below it, and on that new one just turn off the corrections, then toggle between the two, it's easier to tell what's getting changed/fixed.

For those wondering why get a 4K X70 over a cheaper AX100? Anyone with some good PP settings that toggles up to PP/off can tell you!

Paul